Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bruere@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 18:48:06 +0000
GreenDistantStar wrote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:GreenDistantStar wrote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:GreenDistantStar wrote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:GreenDistantStar wrote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:GreenDistantStar wrote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:GreenDistantStar wrote:
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
I would say that Chi is the subjective manifestation of the partial integration of the conscious and subconscious mind, leading to partially conscious control over what are normally assumed to be autonomic functions.
That works for me. I call that 'visualization' and it doesn't need meridians and it doesn't explain anything else other than what you said.
GDS
"Let's roll!"
Here's another example of Chi.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UpH-oGS5V8
So is this visualization, or just another claim that there's something there that isn't?
Take a more pragmatic approach.
If I was any more pragmatic, we wouldn't be discussing this.
The discussion should then move into the arena of psychology
Perhaps, but I doubt for the reasons you may have in mind....
/NLP/magickWhatever works.
Neither of those two will.
They do.
NLP is a crock, pop psychology/psuedoscience for the gullible. allowing otherwise dim people to sound profound. Here's a good example of how this bs leaks into the communal consciousness.
I was out looking at houses a few weeks ago, and this alpha-chick real estate agent (complete with BMW 3 Series and Blackberry) tries to befriend me, engage in personal conversation yadda, yadda.
So she asks me as we're walking around this house "So how many bedrooms will you need?" "How old are your kids?" all fair enough questions, and then asks "And what is your son studying at university?" to which I replied "Philosophy, Communications and Linguistics" to which she replies....
"Wow...so they're studying NLP at universtiy now!?"
'nuff said, eh?
You have to choose the correct circumstances.
Under what circumstances will magic work, and of course, under what circumstances will it *not* work, and why not?
LOL! I'm writing a whole book on that one!
I could write a book about real estate agents. Is there *any* 'profession' less capable of justifying its own existence? Exacerbating the issue is the ill-founded hubris of its practitioners, who've prospered in the largest asset bubble of all time, all the while thinking they're great salespeople.
Not too many smiley faces in the real estate game now.
A big trick where money was passed in circles and everyone took a cut until it was all gone. Then the govt bailed them out.
Go to youtube and pull up some Derren Brown stuff. Bear in mind that it's a mixture of psychology, hypnotism, NLP and straightforward trickery.
Yeah, his stuff has done the rounds here before. Any time he fronts at a mma or bjj academy to prove his stuff, let us know.
As for magick, that ranges from the fringes of Psi to pre-psychology that has yet to hit the mainstream.
Well, when there's proof it works, let me know, but until then, it's in the same basket as faeries, goblins and chi-induced levitation.
When it works, it gets relabeled and repackaged as science.
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.onetribe.me.uk/wordpress/?cat=5 - Our podcasts on weird stuff
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Pierre Honeyman
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- References:
- Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Renli
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Renli
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Greendistantstar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Renli
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Greendistantstar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Renli
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: GreenDistantStar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Renli
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: GreenDistantStar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: GreenDistantStar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: GreenDistantStar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: GreenDistantStar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: GreenDistantStar
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- From: GreenDistantStar
- Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- Prev by Date: Re: is foot work a factor !
- Next by Date: Re: One-Inch Punch is NOT CHI: Proof
- Previous by thread: Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- Next by thread: Re: Who here is capable of a rational discussion of Chi?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading